Slash and Fanfic (was: Responses to assaults on my parenting)

[gwendolyngrace <gwendolyngrace@yahoo.com>]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Haggridd 
<jkusalavagemd at y...>" <jkusalavagemd at y...> wrote:

 
> I would like to raise some counter-questions to the ones you pose:
> > 
> > 
> 
> Counter-question #1:  If you write fiction that is so antithetical 
to 
> the stories as written by the author, why do you want to write 
> "fan" fiction in the first place? Write about Jim and Joe and 
Dilbert 
> and Bobby Sue instead.
> 

Because, clearly, the author in that instance doesn't feel the fic is 
too much of a stretch--or if they *do* acknowledge a major shift, 
they are playing with what the audience thinks they know in order to 
change things around. Someone who sees slash potential in the canon 
from the beginning wouldn't necessarily see their interpretation as 
any sort of antithesis of the books.


> > 
> 
> I'll snip your example of Fred.  I don't have a counter-question 
> other than to ask why a writer would want to create a character 
with 
> such a life-defining characteristic, one which profoundly affects 
> outlook, philosophy and behavior, and have the character act, 
think, 
> want, love, precisely the same as if he/she did not have this life-
> defining characteristic.?  What would be the point?

You're assuming that orientation must necessarily inform every other 
aspect of one's life. Know any members of Gay Republicans? You're 
also assuming that characters cannot be dynamic. And you're also 
ignoring that frequently authors choose to work with characters 
already in existence for a variety of reasons, including "seeing it 
that way" as I explain above, as well as wanting an identifiable 
person whom the audience will know instantly, as well as for the 
specific purpose of subverting the books and deliberately playing 
upon the stereotypes.

> If your thesis is that there is absolutely no difference in these 
> attributes between gay persons and straight persons, I can only say 
> that perhaps the writewr needs some more exposure to life before 
> attempting this character.
>

Excuse me? Again, you are assuming that being gay absolutely informs 
every other decision one makes in life. Now who is raising straw men?

My point is that a person is more than the sum of all the things that 
make him an individual--and while orientation is a very important 
part of that combination, it is by far not the only thing--or even 
the most important thing. Also, as others have said, orientation 
could well be something determined long before the person actually 
puts together his or her personal equation. Other aspects, such as 
political views, favourite colour, and everything else, are formed 
right alongside and among every other piece of one's makeup. 

If you think that in order to be "gay" one must conform to the 
stereotypes, one must live the lifestyle and participate in the 
community--that, in short, one must change everything both outward 
and inward, then perhaps you are the one who needs further 
acquaintance with "life"--or at least, the lives of the GLBT.

Perhaps you thought I was trivializing the process of realization one 
goes through to come out. If I gave that impression, I'm sorry--
speaking as someone who's been through it, I wouldn't do that 
intentionally.

However, whether one's process was easy or prolonged, the fact 
remains that orientation does *not* have to mean anything else 
changes. Any person whom you do not know to be gay is still the same 
person five seconds after they tell you they are. *That* is the point 
for which I used Fred as an illustration--that nothing else *needs* 
to change in his overall characterisation. Do you think if Fred were 
gay, he would no longer play practical jokes? Do you think he would 
stop playing Quidditch? Do you think he would suddenly feel 
differently about Malfoy, or change his position on house-elves? Do 
you believe his speech pattern would suddenly change? What, exactly, 
do you think "coming out" does to someone? Did I grow horns a 
paragraph ago because I came out?

One can't make assumptions about any other aspect of a person just 
because of sexuality. As John said, do not assume that because 
someone is gay it means they are promiscuous. Neither are they 
liberal, or not Christian, or anything else. I have GLBT friends who 
are Catholic. I have GLBT friends who are Republican. I know about a 
dozen who were married and some who had children before coming out. 
Being gay doesn't mean that, at the age of 40 or so, they decided to 
start clubbing or felt they needed to get a nipple piercing. There 
are gays who believe they have a "community," and gays who are 
skeptical that such a thing exists, or who feel uncomfortable as part 
of it. There are gays who are pro-life, and gays who belong to the 
NRA. 

So yes, actually, I do believe that one can realize one is gay, and 
it doesn't change anything else about oneself. 

But, I suppose that provides an answer to my question. I asked why 
the change of orientation alone should mean a radical change in one's 
opinion of the character.

Apparently, your answer is that you believe the change of orientation 
automatically changes practically everything about the character.

Gwen